A presentation at the 14th International AIDS Conference in Barcelona by a University of Pittsburgh AIDS researcher reveals the "most common cause of death among HIV positive people is liver failure." Dr. Amy Justice bases herconclusions on a study following nearly 6,000 HIV-positive diagnosed patients at four sites in the United States. AIDS establishment scientists have never claimed that HIV damages the liver.

I contacted Dr. Justice by phone to learn more. During our conversation she told me that causes of death among people with AIDS have never been carefully recorded over the years. This is a concern we AIDS realists have been raising for more than a decade only to be dismissed by the AIDSestablishment. Justice said that to the best of her knowledge, her study is the only one that reliably recorded actual cause of death in AIDS patients.

The implications of this admission are astounding. Liver failure is the leading cause of death among individuals being treated with AIDS meds in the only study that reliably records causes of death. Apparently, noestablishment researchers make the important distinction between deaths from AIDS drugs and deaths from diseases called AIDS.

I wondered if this mainstream AIDS scientist might now agree with what AIDS realists have known all along, that AIDS meds can kill. I brought up the issue with Dr. Justice: "I hear your careful presentation of the science,and your careful statements about what your research shows. Can you give me your intuition though, are the AIDS drugs involved in the deaths of thesepeople?"

According to the Justice abstract and the results of another study from theEuropean EuroSIDA cohort also presented at the Barcelona AIDS conference,liver function tests and red blood cell counts are more accurate predictors of illness and death in HIV positives than viral load tests or T cell counts. Both liver toxicity and anemia (low red blood cell levels) are well known side effects of AIDS drug treatment. And like liver damage, anemia is not blamed on HIV.

AIDS establishment studies with similarly profound implications for HIV positive diagnosed persons are regularly published in medical journals, butif the mainstream media is aware of such information, they¹re not telling.

The one mainstream mention of the Justice et al and EuroSIDA findings put a positive spin on the dire news, portraying the studies as merely proving out"simpler and cheaper" methods of measuring risk of death and progression to disease, glossing over the issues of drug-induced liver failure deaths andlife-threatening anemia. According to Medscape¹s report, the studiesilluminate easier and less expensive lab tests, while liver damage and lowred cell counts are "minor metabolic abnormalities."

Interestingly, the Medscape article makes a sudden denouncement of viralload testing, claiming it "has not proved the ultimate marker of the risk ofHIV progression and death" that everyone believed.

From Medscape¹s coverage of the 14th International AIDS Conference:

"Barcelona, Spain; Monday, July 8, 2002 -- The role of surrogate markers topredict survival or other outcomes in HIV disease has been an area ofinterest for many groups, especially as the epidemic has advanced and therange of potential markers has increased. When quantitation of viral loadbecame possible in the mid-1990s, it was widely believed that this wouldprovide the ultimate marker of the risk of HIV progression and death. Infact, this has not proved to be the case, and there has therefore beenrenewed attention to other, perhaps simpler and cheaper measures of risk.The laboratory measures that are routinely evaluated in HIV-infectedpatients include hemoglobin levels as a marker of anemia, and liver functiontests."

Does this mean we toss viral load? Or that viral load remains the ultimatemarker for HIV positives not taking the meds, but liver and anemia tests arethe new ultimate markers for medicated HIV positives?

David Crowe of Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society comments: "I think theimplications are rather sinister. The authors of the Justice study admitthat liver damage is associated with HAART; it is the first factor theylist. To include a surrogate marker that is at least partially controlled bya therapy as a marker of disease progression is very dangerous. If the liverenzymes worsen, does that mean that AIDS is progressing faster and thattreatment should be more aggressive?"

The pharmaceutical companies, establishment AIDS activists, and federallyfunded AIDS scientists have nothing to gain and much to lose if these recentstudies are accurately portrayed and widely disseminated. Without the workof Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives, would you ever hear about studies likethese or know what they really mean?

(Jason Nusbaum is based in New York and serves as Director of Communicationsfor Alive & Well)

The Body is a service of Remedy Health Media, LLC, 750 3rd Avenue, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10017. The Body and its logos are trademarks of Remedy Health Media, LLC, and its subsidiaries, which owns the copyright of The Body's homepage, topic pages, page designs and HTML code. General Disclaimer: The Body is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through The Body should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your health care provider.